The graphic suggests a 0.2% false accusation rate (2 / 1000). It’s not even consistent with the previous feminist rhetoric (2%) which itself was proven to be false (too low!) multiple times.
Also, pretending to know the exact number of unreported rapes is dishonest to say the least, feminist-inspired mumbo-jumbo notwithstanding. The definition of an unreported rape is that it is NOT REPORTED so nobody knows how many of them exist.
Also, people deemed innocent by the courts are NOT rapists, and most of the people accused but not sent to trial are not rapists either.
Also, instilling this false sense of security in actual potential rapists (you’ll get away with it 99% of the time) is actively HARMING women because it encourages potential rapists to commit the crime.
Also, this is unnecessary fearmongering and it displays a stunning hatred of men.

Like this:

Related

7 Responses to Lie-o-graphics

The infographic misuses statistics grossly or is outright wrong in many places. What’s sad is that, given that foundation, you still fuck up your criticism so badly the feminists you decry are doing it better – and they’re doing it when it supports an argument they agree with.

a) The graph’s claim that 2 of 1000 people are falsely accused is perfectly consistent with their 2% false accusation rate because *only 10% of those 1000 people are ever accused*. We have to be accused to be falsely accused. Let’s break it down:
Assuming we have 1000 rapes:
If 10% are accused, we have 100 accusations.
If 2% *of those* are falsely accused, we have 2 false accusations.

b) We estimate the number of unreported assaults. We estimate the number of unreported drug deals. We estimate the number of unregistered guns in the country. It’s not like estimating unreported rapes is some kind of crazy feminist idea. I don’t know if you’re being dishonest or just dumb when you claim otherwise.

Granted, 10% and 2% are almost certainly wrong. More likely numbers seem to be 35% and 7%. Criticize those numbers all you like. Although perhaps you should refrain when since you don’t seem to understand statistics.

I’d say he understands statistics better than either of you, and it’s quite obvious that that the assumptions and statistics used in that graph were selectively chosen to make a point.

So no, D506, there’s no reason to suspect there was any “real attempt” to figure out the non-report rate of rape at all. More to the point, of all the alleged rapes not reported (say alleged to friends/social circles etc) some of them are false accusations as well.

But no feminist would ever deem it appropriate if an MRA was to wave his hands and take 10 to 30 percent of the alleged “rapes not reported” and declare them false accusations. The thing with non-reports is that you just don’t – and can’t- know. However, you can guess. And if I had to guess given that we have things to make it easier to convict rapists and make it far easier for victims to report (anonymous report lines, victims advocates in the justice system, Federal Rules of evidence that treat alleged rapists differently than any other criminal via allowing past accusations *not convictions, just accusations* of sexual misconduct to be used against him/her, “Rape Shield” laws and more!) I doubt it’s over 50 percent, and I think the main reason is that whatever happened to them the victims don’t feel it was rape (even if the law might define it as such) and don’t feel the punishment is fair for the crime. Or maybe they could just believe “info”graphics like this and think it’s futile to report in the first place…

@D506,
On point a) you are somewhat right. It’s still incorrect that way because it displays the 2 FRAs outside the supposed 100 accusations but hey, this is just nitpicking. The real problem is that even the 2% was a f_cked up lie.
Your point b) is stupid though. There are many (and I mean MANY) articles out there discussing how feminists have overshot their rape (and practically every other) estimations by some orders of magnitudes. Like the 1 in 4 raped on campus shit, the hundreds of thousands of child prostitutes and whores transported to the places of world sport events, and of course the thing we are talking about right now, the number of unreported rapes. It was shown many times that the feminist “rape cases” (cough cough) included women answering yes to questions like “have you ever felt bad after a sex act?” or “have you ever had sex under the influence of alcohol?”. These are not unreported rape estimates, these are bullshit. Plain and simple.
Also, the one honest mistake in my argument is still way less harmful, less stupid and less malicious than that misandrist propaganda, so please spare me from your condescensding bullshit.

I never said the unreported rape statistic was in any way correct. I said that it’s quite possible to estimate it, the same way we do every other ‘unreported whatever’ statistics. You’re both arguing that the numbers of unreported rapes are garbage as if that refused my point. It doesn’t. I agreed with you that the numbers are likely garbage.

What I challenged was your claim that unreported rapes is inherently something we can’t estimate and that any attempt to do so is crazy ‘feminist mumbo-jumbo’. I said that that claim is either dishonest or dumb. I maintain that.

From your post:
“The definition of an unreported rape is that it is NOT REPORTED so nobody knows how many of them exist.”
Frankly, this is basically something someone who doesn’t understand statistics would say. I think you realize that, because no one has attempted to defend it. You’ve both built straw men instead. Again, this is not the same as saying “the methodology used to calculate the number they got is so flawed and ideologically driven it is garbage”. Which I would agree with. But that is not what you said.

You’re still way too condescending. You cite what I said and it was that nobody knows how many rapes are there which nobody knows about (except the perp and the victim). What do you know, it is a perfectly true statement. You say we can guess – I never said we can’t. I only said feminist estimates are way off target. Which is another perfectly true statement.

Also, the real problem is not that they misestimate the number of unreported rapes – it’s
1. they knowingly lie and multiply any reasonable estimate by at least 100 to slander men; and
2. they try to hide that those numbers are estimates. The title of the infographic is “The truth about false accusation”, truth being the operative word, which is patently and demonstrably false. Their motives are clearly foul, they want people (mainly women) to believe that these numbers are the “truth” but they aren’t. Those are highly biased guesses and estimates tainted by misandrist propaganda. They intentionally overestimate the prevalence of unreported rape (and thus all rape) by some orders of magnitude(!) while they consciously underestimate the prevalence of false rape accusations. They also muddy the waters on purpose by implying that everybody who was reported for rape, or faced trial but was deemed innocent are actually rapists getting away with it. The graphic is misleading that way and I can’t chalk it up to some small mistake. Everything about this “infographic” reeks of misandry and it’s full of lies and covert misinformation. (Or should I say dissimulation quoting Arthur Schopenhauer?)

D506:
But any guess you make based on whatever method (almost always a survey of some type, though I suppose you could do a “surveillance” type of experiment but it would be very expensive, time-consuming , and probably illegal ) you use, is just that, a guess. It partly depends on how you define rape, and there is actual disagreement about that in the laws in various places. Then there’s things like statutory (also varies by place to place as to AOC and do you include it in your “rapes” figure in the first place?) rape and different punishments for rapes in various political areas. Add these things together and you can make “unreported rapes” add up to almost anything you want, though I suspect most feminists don’t even bother going through the effort. This is not something easily amenable to statistical analysis, as one can see.

I found some useful information here, interesting writing about this. I will need to research this subject! Not to hijack this thread, but I am looking to get some design jobs completed and came across a company – SEOdress, 25 Cadillac Drive #111 Sacramento, CA 95825 (916) 850-0736. Have you heard anything about them ?